A local dealer positioned the Maroney sticker on a Veloster's backlight glass, making me realize the Hyundai may qualify as a revived liftback of sorts. I'm sure you'd look good 'neath the louvers in an old SR5.

Looks pretty good on the surface. A mid-engine Porsche that goes 0-60 in 4.5 seconds for the price of a BMW M2! Only one problem - by the time you get done adding the options necessary to make the equipment match (as close as possible) you don't HAVE a $54,000 mid-engine Porsche that will go 0-60 in 4.5 seconds. You have an $80,000 mid-engine Porsche that goes 0-60 in 4.5 seconds (and the M2 will still thump it in a straight line).

Here's the thing: you need to throw back to early "sports car mode." See it for what it is, not what it could become. Think of it as a modern take on a Fiat 124 Spyder (with a roof), or MG. Go bare bones and just enjoy the fun. If you can stay away from Alcantara fuel filler caps and napa leather air vents, both you and your wallet will be happier, probably.

Ive been a 911 and anything close to it fan, since birth.. My white Wolfsburg born Golf is as close as I will likely get to anything even remotely related to a blood line like This Machine.. So no matter anyone else's numbers, this car is just stunning.

At least 4 cylinder Porsches have been around since the get go. The real die hards still aren't over water cooled engines, the switch to which, for them, was the Molotov Ribbentrop pact of the car world.

I still don't like the idea of a Porsche SUV, but I will be the first to admit they did a good job with them.

I was a big supporter of a Porsche sports sedan, but they really botched the look on that first Panamera. Looks like that has been fixed for Gen 2. Now I'd like to see them do a smaller sedan; possibly using the new Cayman engines.

In fact, I was one of the first to own a 1.8T GLX in Ru Paul red. (Same as concurrent spec for the GTI.) [Thirteen years and 150,000 mi later, I'd put more miles on him than on any previous car. When it blew up in a usual huff of smoke. Plebeian friends were trading their unloved Cutlass Malibus with 300,000 naturally aspirated miles...]

'Frank got the correct answer! [Do you mean by saying "call" that you actually engage in CL biz by using your voice with another human being?]

I am a 'Jew, and Jews don't complain. I loved both our 1.8Ts - and my ex - for thirteen years. I tried selling cars for awhile when I lost my aviation career. (He only lost his mind.) Once, I took a friend's millenial Malibu in trade, with the equally unloved 3.1L, and noted it was similar to a few other naturally aspirated (GM, Toyota, Tennessee-built) throwaway cars I'd taken in excess of 300,000 miles.

I've since formed a personal expectation that an entire motorcar should (not biodegrade and) thrive for at least 300,000 - with American Regular and maintenance - if it is to meet my higher authority. God forbid that any product today should exceed any corporal being's expectations.

Granted, it is hard to complain about your turbocharged engine going half the distance - and matching mine of twenty years ago.

While the N/A flat 6 will be missed, for its high revving character and wonderful soundtrack, I can understand Porsche's business case for the 2.0T. The 2.7L was for many a hard sell, as your Grandmother's Camry V6 could almost keep up with it on a straight line. The base Cayman is now properly quick, and as the article states, even makes the case for the S difficult to justify.
It will be hard, however, to beat the fun of a manual and the N/A engine.

Its not just how high it redlines, it is where the power comes in. With a manual, I like the power coming in at high RPM, but admittedly, this is a preference. It is the character of the engine I think we are losing. I also will state that it is at least a good replacement--as I stated, it is now fast as expected.

Unlike the 2.7 that effortlessly revved to 5000 rpm and beyond. Sining a song that was sooo sweet. Even in stop and go traffic. I remember making a pass with the PDK transmission and seeing the tech pass 6500 rpm without any vibration at all. My only indication of high revs was the sound, swell of power and the tech. You can have the T4. No thank you. You want instant torque? Ford and Chevy will give you torque at a fraction of the price.

I agree completely. That's my point. My comment was in jest; a response to the fact that the article made a big deal about the specific output. But why? That's the norm these days with just about every production car getting a turbo.

Also, thanks for pointing out that a $55,000 Porsche is a better car than my 10 year old Honda. I had no idea.

It seems like a very nice car but I just can't generate any enthusiasm for these turbo 4s. In other reviews, they have been criticized for sounding really bad. The sound files are not that great either. WhenI was ordering my 13 Boxster with the 3.4, I was excited and looking forward to the car. These new cars, I am not even sure I want to test drive one. I guess I am just happy with my car.

Porsche has a history of using 4 cylinders. While nothing will replace the flatt six wail, they are using a flat four, not the VW corporate inline 4 (not that there is anything wrong with that). And a flat four has a characteristic sound that I rather like.

the flat 4 gives a lower center of gravity and that is the finishing touch that porsche has and few others do. The subaru BRZ also has a great low CG, and is the best handling car in its class. I wouldnt hesitate to buy the base cayman here, plenty fast with a nice flat power curve.

54K base price for a porsche sports car , option it up to 60K with the pdk and some add ons and you have a sweet 60K car....best value in a porsche since the old school 944's. and you don't have to justify the lack of straight line power by explaining the purity of the mid engine design because the turbo-4's will give you that now too. I think the 4's will take getting used to but once you have that torque you don't want to go back

Is it just me or doesn't it cost porsche more money to design and build two engines. They could have saved a lot of money buy only producing the S engine and then selling it between the price of the base and the S. Crazy marketing and options game if you ask me. I could see the need for a track and a street version but not a need for different engines.

I wish Porsche would have given this Cayman a little more power if only for bragging rights. The WRX STI and the new Focus RS have the same 1/4 mile times as (estimated for) the new Cayman manual, and all three now have turbocharged 4-cylinder engines. It seems like the Cayman is still being sandbagged by Porsche to allow the 911 to save face.

What is always left out in this kind of comparison is that with the Focus you buy a $35,000 car with the bones of a $17,225 car. The Cayman on the other hand is a $52,600 car through and through. That is a difference in quality, sophistication and workmanship that you will always feel and notice. Way more so than half a second here or there.

I'm reminded of a co-worker suggesting to me after I'd bought a gray market M6 in 1985 that I might just as well have purchased a Mustang GT like he had. Numbers-wise, he had a point; otherwise, not really.

Everyone is all bent out of shape about this but I don't think it's that bad. This car seems pretty legit. It's quick light and puts up some very respectable numbers. I like the way it looks and besides it's not like the 912 and 914 weren't a thing. There is historical precedence for a 4 cylinder in a non 911 application.

I bought mine fee weeks ago and I cannot complain about anything. Lots people saying about the noise but you need to drive one first then you can give a better opinion about this new engine. I had first gen of cayman and this new one feels much better in every point. I feel like this new engine is like Ducati bikes, or you will love it or hate it...